Skip to main content

About your Search

English 10
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
of savings from spending on health care and revenues from closing loopholes, we consult the deficit issue without sacrificing our investments in things like education that are going to help us grow. it turns out the american people agree with me. they listened to an entire year's debate over this issue, and they made a clear decision about the approach they prefer. they do not think it is fair to ask a senior to pay more for his or her health care or a scientist to shut down like that saving research so that a multi millionaire investor can take less in tax rates then a second trip -- and a secretary. they do not think it is smart to protect and as corporate loopholes and tax breaks for the wealthiest americans rather than rebuild roads and schools or help manufacturers bring jobs back to america. they want us to get our books in order in a balanced way where everyone pulls their weight, everyone does their part. that is what i want as well. that is what i have proposed. we can get it done, but we're going to have to make sure people are looking at this irresponsible way, rather than just
can't finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone. simply put, the president got his tax increases in the last congress. it's time for this congress to tackle washington's spending bing. i'd like to recognize the gentlelady from indiana. >> mr. chairman, my message otoday is simple. on too many big items, congress has been kicking the can down the road for years. it's time to supply real leadership on the most pressing challenges we face. this is the only way we can restore trust in congress. we're fast approaching a dead end. the social security trust fund will be bankrupt in 20 years. medicare and medicaid are not on a sustainable path. it is wrong for us to make proppingses to the american people we know we cannot keep. ms. brooks: we must address the drivers of our debt, medicare, medicaid, an social security. not because these programs don't have merit and certainly not because seniors currently benefiting from them don't deserve with they've been promised. because real leadership isn't about making the easy choice, it's about maybing the right choice. social
for the taxpayers' use or the expression goes, to reduce the federal deficit. >> thank you, gentleman. i yield back, mr. chairman. >> mr. hastings. >> i don't have any questions. >> thank you very much. without a doubt of funds, which i'm working on, -- [inaudible] [laughter] >> thank you, mr. chairman. i ask that the gentleman, i know he's speaking on behalf of the constituents when we bring the amendment to the bill, the size of the package with the addition of your amendment, becomes larger than many entire appropriations bills. $60 billion. that's larger than homeland security appropriations bill. mr. king, that's larger than the financial services appropriation bill. that's larger than the state department foreign operations appropriations bill. these are bills from which this congress deliberates for months. hearing the chairman say before you came up to testify that he was committed to making sure that your folks get those things that they need. hearing the priorities that everyone has laid out, knowing these are not optional things that are needed, these are mandatory things that are need
reduced the federal deficit even by a dollar. we are not going to get out of this overnight. this would allow us to keep reducing the deficits. we have a shared value in eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. we are intent on that. host: how much of the budget does waste, fraud, and abuse make up? guest: i could go back to virginia beach, virginia, and we could identify waste every day. we will never eliminate it entirely. we can do a better job. it will take reforms. we are living longer and we have fewer people paying in. i want to protect those who are hurting the most, like art, who called in earlier. host: lester is a republican. caller: good morning. disability, 63 years old. my wife still works. $45,000 a less taw less than year. somehow someone is going to have to do something about this. guest: i agree completely. i believe it is immoral for one generation to pass on debt that dims their future. those who have served our country -- i am mindful of the price paid by our goldstar families. we're failing the young people. i am with you. i was over it. i believe when americans are gi
of all, we've had some deficit reduction. the president laid out a couple days ago. we had over $2 # trillion. we had a trillion and a half that came from previous actions, and then we added just a few days ago some further deficit reduction through increased taxes on the very wealthy of this country. we already begun to undertake deficit reduction. to use that as a reason to use the debt ceiling as a weapon is really playing with fire. they say pay some bills and not pay others. we've never tried that before. >> host: is it feasible? >> guest: i don't think so. which bills? social security? veterans? people out fighting for this country? which bills do you pay? we never tried that. i think the president put it so well. this is not a debt beat nation, really, and i think common sense is likely to prevail within the republican ranks. i know, if i might say so, if not firsthand, second hand, that the leadership within the house republican caucus, not all of it, i think some of it realizes that the potential consequences. >> host: if president obama won, so to speak on the fiscal clif
wants for guns, for example. he will have to talk a lot more in the state of the union about deficit control. we have this new fox poll out tonight to. people are upset about fiscal cliff deal. when asked if their paycheck is smaller this year because of more taxfuls being taken out 60% say yes 25% say no. he is going to have to talk about more deficit reduction. they will do a will little partying this weekend they real lives it's right back to work, bill. >> word of a solution to prevent the united states from defaultingen its debt. the house majority leader eric cantor saying that lawmakers will vote next week on a short-term plan to let the government borrow more money effectively raising the debt ceiling. the deal not all worked out just yet. but apparently it this will not require the spending cuts that house republicans had wanted. just released fox news poll finds that 69% favor raising the debt limit only if there are major spending cuts involved. and 23% say it's reckless not to raise it regardless. the poll also shows more than 8 in 10 think government spending is out of c
in the late 1980's when we didn't have to talk about how to pay for disaster assistance because the deficit was only $3 trillion. but we've so badly mismanaged our money after that, by the time we got to hurricane katrina in 2005, that we actually did start talking about offsetting and paying for disaster relief and paid for and offset about 40% of it. but we didn't learn. we didn't learn from those mistakes and we've continued to mismanage our money and to run up our deficit to such a point now where we're at $16 trillion today and it's incumbent upon us to have the discussion about whether or not we have the money to do this. and whether or not it's important enough to us to pay for it. i wish very much that we weren't here today. i wish very much that we could pass this and easily borrow the money, without any questions whatsoever. but we've wasted that opportunity. we've mismanaged our own finances to the point where we are now no longer capable of taking care of our own. think about that for a second. in the united states of america we do not have enough money to take care of our own c
this. yes, it may run up the immediate deficit, but once again, for every dollar that we invest in those levees we not only save lives and property, but we put people to work and we get the economic engine going. further up in my district, again, along the sacramento and the rivers, i have a project that's 44 miles of levee that clearly will fail. it has failed four times in the last 60 years. lives have been lost. one of the most catastrophic failures of a levee happened in this stretch of river. we need to rebuild that. the federal government's role in these construction projects of these levees has gone back to the very beginning of this nation and it is congress' task to allocate the money to decide the projects that are going to be built. but unfortunately we tied ourselves in knots here with certain rules that have been put in by our republican colleagues that prevent us from taking the necessary action to protect our communities. we're not talking about, you know, willy nily unnecessary projects. we're talking about saving -- nilly unnecessary projects. we're talking abou
veer -- inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put at a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to dig out of that. it is very difficult for organizations, especially in a crisis response, to think about just releasing the information before it's asked for and remove that deficit. i've been involved in several situations where the information was available and the information was understandable and probably mitigated some of the concerns, but because of the way the companies in the government work, it was difficult to make that transparent and then catching up with that with the american public is really, really difficult. nancy and marcia, we had talked about this with jay a lot. one of the problems we have in mental anguishing impacts -- measuring the impacts of the spill in the gulf is the lack of the background of the presence of hydrocarbons as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. in the context of moving beyond the direct aims of the research that's going to be conducted with the bp money, what do you think the lar
. the problem is if you'd inadvertently did not disclose information, you are put out a credibility deficit with the public, and sometimes it is hard to get out of that, and it is difficult for or organizations to think about releasing the information before it is out for. -- asked for. i have been involved in several situations where the information was available and understandable. it mitigated some concerns. it was difficult to make that transparent, and catching up with that is really difficult. one reason for the impact was the lack of information as a baseline for understanding there had been a change. as a context for moving beyond the research done, what do you think the larger research agenda ought to be about? >> the hydrocarbons in the continental shelf and inland areas are pretty well known. it is the deep sea we did not have information for. i think the deep sea ecosystem is an area we need to emphasize, and some of the longer living organisms such as marine mammals. one of the issues is the effect of multiple stressors. we have some smart jury is that were heavily oiled, and s
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10